Comparação entre métodos de estimativa da idade óssea: Greulich & Pyle, Eklöf & Ringertz e atlas digital de Gilsanz & Ratib

• Autor(a) principal: Benemann, Eleonora Soares
• Data de Publicação: 2009
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional PUCRS
• Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/10923/410
• topic: ODONTOLOGIA; ORTODONTIA; ORTOPEDIA FACIAL; OSSOS - RADIOGRAFIA; OSSOS - DESENVOLVIMENTO

The current research aimed at evaluating the skeletal age, by means of hand and wrist radiographies, using the methods Greulich & Pyle (G&P) (1959), Eklöf & Ringertz (E&R) (1967) and the Gilsanz & Ratib digital atlas (G&R) (2005). The ages obtained from the three methods were compared, and the degree of concordance among them was determined. In order to accomplish these goals, a sample of 80 children was analyzed, 40 of the masculine gender and 40 of the feminine gender, varying from 7 to 15 years-old. All the radiographies of the individuals in the sample were digitized. Concerning the Greulich & Pyle method, an inspection evaluation of the images in the sample was carried out, comparing those images with the radiographies found at the standard atlas (“Radiographic atlas of skeletal development of the hand and wrist”), following the authors' instructions. For Eklöf & Ringertz method, the linear measures were carried out through the program Image Tool and, subsequently, the results were compared with the rates supposed by the authors. Referring to Gilsanz & Ratib method, the digitized images were compared with the images of the authors' digital atlas. Throughout the results, it was possible to realize that there was no expressive difference for the results between the methods Greulich & Pyle and Eklöf & Ringertz, not even for those between the methods Greulich & Pyle and Gilsanz & Ratib. Otherwise, when the rates obtained between the methods Eklöf & Ringertz and Gilsanz & Ratib were compared, statistically expressive differences were observed. In the genre comparison, important differences between the methods used were not noticed. Comparing the three methods concerning valuation of the bone age, Eklöf & Ringertz method presented the highest compatibility with the chronological age of the sample analyzed and Gilsanz & Ratib method presented the lowest one.